Paper · 2015 · Journal of Plant Nutrition and Fertilizer

Effect of different fertilization modes on topsoil organic carbon sequestration and productivity in yellow paddy field of southern China

Wang Fe

19
claims
23
verbatim quotes
1
citations
1
research areas
—
Not open access

Abstract

[Objectives]The objective of this study was to explore effects of different fertilization on topsoil organic carbon sequestration and productivity in a yellow paddy field of southern China,fix carbon and reduce carbon emission,and improve the rice yield as well.[Methods]Data were collected from the thirty second year of a longterm experiment in the yellow paddy field in Fujian Province.There were four fertilization treatments in the longterm field experiment:no fertilizer(CK),chemical fertilizer(NPK),chemical fertilizer plus cattle manure(NPKM) and chemical fertilizer plus straw(NPKS).We investigated influences of different fertilization regimes on topsoil organic carbon sequestration and productivity.[Results]Compared with the CK,the average yields of rice grain in the treatments of NPK,NPKM and NPKS were significantly increased by 67.1%,88.1%and 84.2%,respectively,and the average yields in NPKM and NPKS were significantly higher than that in NPK.Among the fertilization treatments,the contents of top soil organic carbon were improved by 8.9%-36.8%and the content of the NPKM treatment was significantly higher than those of the NPKS and NPK treatments.Compared to the initial soil condition,the organic carbon contents in all treatments were improved by 1.84-5.26 g/kg.Taking every 10 years as the assessing period,there were significant differences of the carbon sequestration rates between the NPKM and NPKS treatments and the CK and NPK treatments,and the rates in the NPKM and NPKS treatments were 2.38 and 1.98 times of that of the CK treatment and 1.59 and 1.32 times of that of the NPK treatment during the double cropping rice years,respectively,while there was no significant difference between the NPK treatment and the CK treatment.There was a vary significant power function relationship between the annual organic carbon input and carbon sequestration in the paddy field ecosystem.The contents of fertilizing soil organic carbon were also very significantly correlated to the yields of rice grain.[Conclusions]Compared with the single chemical fertilizer,the chemical fertilizer plus cattle manure or straw can steadily increase rice yield.The soil organic carbon will be maintained a slightly increase under the long-term no fertilizer.The soil organic carbon sequestration efficiency is gradually reduced with the increase of soil organic carbon content.Compared with the single chemical fertilizer,the chemical fertilizer plus cattle manure or straw has obvious priority in increasing the organic carbon sequestration rate,which is a win-win measure of improving the yellow paddy field productivity and fixing carbon.

Abstract from the paper’s OpenAlex record, shown for indexing and research. Copyright remains with the authors or the publisher. Read at the source ↗

The text the model read, with the source record’s inline markup (italics, sub- and superscripts) rendered and its character entities decoded; quote offsets refer to the raw text.

Claims 19

Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPK significantly increased rice grain yield by 67.1% compared with CK.

Treatment
NPKe0
Outcome
average yields of rice graine0
Direction
increasede0
Value
67.1%e0
Comparator
CKe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with the CK,the average yields of rice grain in the treatments of NPK,NPKM and NPKS were significantly increased by 67.1%,88.1%and 84.2%,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 720–878 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKM significantly increased rice grain yield by 88.1% compared with CK.

Treatment
NPKMe0
Outcome
average yields of rice graine0
Direction
increasede0
Value
88.1%e0
Comparator
CKe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with the CK,the average yields of rice grain in the treatments of NPK,NPKM and NPKS were significantly increased by 67.1%,88.1%and 84.2%,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 720–878 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKS significantly increased rice grain yield by 84.2% compared with CK.

Treatment
NPKSe0
Outcome
average yields of rice graine0
Direction
increasede0
Value
84.2%e0
Comparator
CKe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with the CK,the average yields of rice grain in the treatments of NPK,NPKM and NPKS were significantly increased by 67.1%,88.1%and 84.2%,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 720–878 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKM rice yield was significantly higher than NPK.

Treatment
NPKMe0
Outcome
average yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
NPKe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the average yields in NPKM and NPKS were significantly higher than that in NPK.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 883–962 · show in text ↑
e1

“average yields of rice grain”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 745–773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKS rice yield was significantly higher than NPK.

Treatment
NPKSe0
Outcome
average yieldse0
Direction
highere0
Comparator
NPKe0

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“the average yields in NPKM and NPKS were significantly higher than that in NPK.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 883–962 · show in text ↑
e1

“average yields of rice grain”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 745–773 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilization improved topsoil organic carbon contents by 8.9%-36.8%.

Treatment
fertilization treatmentse0
Outcome
contents of top soil organic carbone0
Direction
improvede0
Value
8.9%-36.8%e0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“Among the fertilization treatments,the contents of top soil organic carbon were improved by 8.9%-36.8%”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 962–1064 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKM topsoil organic carbon content was significantly higher than NPKS and NPK.

Treatment
NPKMe0
Outcome
contents of top soil organic carbone1
Direction
highere0
Comparator
NPKS and NPK treatmentse0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“the content of the NPKM treatment was significantly higher than those of the NPKS and NPK treatments.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1068–1169 · show in text ↑
e1

“contents of top soil organic carbon”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1001–1036 · show in text ↑
Observationobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Organic carbon contents increased by 1.84-5.26 g/kg in all treatments relative to initial soil conditions.

Outcome
organic carbon contentse0
Direction
improvede0
Value
1.84-5.26 g/kge0
Qualifier
all treatmentse0
Comparator
initial soil conditione0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Compared to the initial soil condition,the organic carbon contents in all treatments were improved by 1.84-5.26 g/kg.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1169–1286 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKM carbon sequestration rate was significantly different and 2.38 times CK during double cropping rice years using ten-year assessment periods.

Treatment
NPKMe0
Outcome
carbon sequestration ratese0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
2.38e0
Qualifier
during the double cropping rice yearse0
Comparator
CKe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Taking every 10 years as the assessing period,there were significant differences of the carbon sequestration rates between the NPKM and NPKS treatments and the CK and NPK treatments,and the rates in the NPKM and NPKS treatments were 2.38 and 1.98 times of that of the CK treatment and 1.59 and 1.32 times of that of the NPK treatment during the double cropping rice years,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1286–1670 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKS carbon sequestration rate was significantly different and 1.98 times CK during double cropping rice years.

Treatment
NPKSe0
Outcome
carbon sequestration ratese0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
1.98e0
Qualifier
during the double cropping rice yearse0
Comparator
CKe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Taking every 10 years as the assessing period,there were significant differences of the carbon sequestration rates between the NPKM and NPKS treatments and the CK and NPK treatments,and the rates in the NPKM and NPKS treatments were 2.38 and 1.98 times of that of the CK treatment and 1.59 and 1.32 times of that of the NPK treatment during the double cropping rice years,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1286–1670 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKM carbon sequestration rate was significantly different and 1.59 times NPK during double cropping rice years.

Treatment
NPKMe0
Outcome
carbon sequestration ratese0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
1.59e0
Qualifier
during the double cropping rice yearse0
Comparator
NPKe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Taking every 10 years as the assessing period,there were significant differences of the carbon sequestration rates between the NPKM and NPKS treatments and the CK and NPK treatments,and the rates in the NPKM and NPKS treatments were 2.38 and 1.98 times of that of the CK treatment and 1.59 and 1.32 times of that of the NPK treatment during the double cropping rice years,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1286–1670 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultpositivesignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

NPKS carbon sequestration rate was significantly different and 1.32 times NPK during double cropping rice years.

Treatment
NPKSe0
Outcome
carbon sequestration ratese0
Direction
higherinferrede0
Value
1.32e0
Qualifier
during the double cropping rice yearse0
Comparator
NPKe0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Taking every 10 years as the assessing period,there were significant differences of the carbon sequestration rates between the NPKM and NPKS treatments and the CK and NPK treatments,and the rates in the NPKM and NPKS treatments were 2.38 and 1.98 times of that of the CK treatment and 1.59 and 1.32 times of that of the NPK treatment during the double cropping rice years,respectively”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1286–1670 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectobservedoriginal resultnot significant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Carbon sequestration rates did not differ significantly between NPK and CK.

Treatment
NPKe0
Outcome
carbon sequestration ratese1
Comparator
CKe0

Not reportedTaxonDirection

Verbatim

e0

“while there was no significant difference between the NPK treatment and the CK treatment.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1671–1760 · show in text ↑
e1

“carbon sequestration rates”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1374–1400 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Annual organic carbon input had a very significant power function relationship with paddy ecosystem carbon sequestration.

Treatment
annual organic carbon inpute0
Outcome
carbon sequestratione0
Qualifier
power function relationshipe0
Setting
paddy field ecosysteme0

Not reportedTaxonDirection

Verbatim

e0

“There was a vary significant power function relationship between the annual organic carbon input and carbon sequestration in the paddy field ecosystem.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1760–1911 · show in text ↑
Associationobservedoriginal resultsignificant (as stated)measured

Claim · model-written summary

Fertilized soil organic carbon contents correlated very significantly with rice grain yields.

Treatment
contents of fertilizing soil organic carbone0
Outcome
yields of rice graine0

Not reportedDirection

Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.

Oryza sativa
Oryza sativa · Taxon · picture from its Wikimedia Commons categoryDesmanthus4food · CC BY-SA 3.0 us · Wikimedia Commons ↗

Verbatim

e0

“The contents of fertilizing soil organic carbon were also very significantly correlated to the yields of rice grain.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1911–2027 · show in text ↑
Intervention effectauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Long-term no fertilizer is interpreted to maintain a slight increase in soil organic carbon.

Treatment
long-term no fertilizere0
Outcome
soil organic carbone0
Direction
increasee0
Qualifier
slightlye0

Not reportedTaxonComparator

Verbatim

e0

“The soil organic carbon will be maintained a slightly increase under the long-term no fertilizer.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2170–2267 · show in text ↑
Associationauthor interpretationoriginal resultnegativemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

Soil carbon sequestration efficiency decreases as soil organic carbon content increases.

Treatment
soil organic carbon contente0
Outcome
soil organic carbon sequestration efficiencye0
Direction
reducede0
Qualifier
graduallye0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“The soil organic carbon sequestration efficiency is gradually reduced with the increase of soil organic carbon content.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2267–2386 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors endorse chemical fertilizer plus cattle manure as a measure to improve productivity and fix carbon compared with chemical fertilizer alone.

Treatment
chemical fertilizer plus cattle manuree0
Outcome
improving the yellow paddy field productivity and fixing carbone0
Comparator
single chemical fertilizere0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with the single chemical fertilizer,the chemical fertilizer plus cattle manure or straw has obvious priority in increasing the organic carbon sequestration rate,which is a win-win measure of improving the yellow paddy field productivity and fixing carbon.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2386–2650 · show in text ↑
Recommendationauthor interpretationoriginal resultpositivebasis n/a

Claim · model-written summary

The authors endorse chemical fertilizer plus straw as a measure to improve productivity and fix carbon compared with chemical fertilizer alone.

Treatment
strawe0
Outcome
improving the yellow paddy field productivity and fixing carbone0
Comparator
single chemical fertilizere0

Not reportedTaxon

Verbatim

e0

“Compared with the single chemical fertilizer,the chemical fertilizer plus cattle manure or straw has obvious priority in increasing the organic carbon sequestration rate,which is a win-win measure of improving the yellow paddy field productivity and fixing carbon.”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 2386–2650 · show in text ↑

fertilization · soil: chemistry · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

305 papers: 280 positive, 25 negative or no effect

279 papers in the same direction as this paper · 23 in the opposite direction · 2 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

301 papers more in this group

See all 305 papers →

fertilization · yield · Oryza sativa (rice)Positive and negative results

3,455 papers: 3,183 positive, 272 negative or no effect

3,182 papers in the same direction as this paper · 207 in the opposite direction · 65 reporting no difference from an alternative

  1. no effect
  2. no effect
  3. negative

3,451 papers more in this group

See all 3,455 papers →

Claims are grouped by organism, treatment and what was measured or targeted. A paper counts as positive when any of its claims in the group is positive.